Sincer v. Widow and Heirs of Bell

Decision Date18 November 1895
Docket Number11,614
Citation18 So. 755,47 La.Ann. 1548
CourtLouisiana Supreme Court
PartiesLOUIS SINCER v. WIDOW and HEIRS OF M. M. BELL

APPEAL from the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans Theard, J.

Argued and submitted February 14, 1895.

On the first hearing the judgment of the District Court was reversed.

Benjamin Rice Forman and Charles Forman, for Plaintiff, Appellant.

Charles F. Claiborne, for Defendants, Appellees.

OPINION

MILLER J.

We have given to this case a re-examination under the light of an elaborate reargument.

It is a suit by plaintiff, condemned to pay damages for negligence brought against the defendant, alleged to have been a participant in the negligence. The plaintiff and defendant Bell, charged with negligence, were both sued by the parties claiming to be injured by that negligence, the falling of the scaffold on which the parties injured were standing, engaged at the time in the construction of a building. Bell, the defendant, was the contractor; Sincer, the plaintiff, the subcontractor for the painting, and the workmen employed by each were the victims of the fall of the scaffold. The basis of the suit for damages was the defect in the scaffold alleged as the cause of the fall, the fault being charged on both. Bell compromised and was discharged from all liability for the damages.

On the theory that both Simpson and Bell were chargeable with negligence, that would produce a liability to the injured party, but no liability one to the other of the wrongdoers. No obligation of Bell, under such circumstances, can be referred to any quasi contract or any offence or quasi offence committed by Bell with respect to Sincer. Obligations arise from contracts or quasi contracts, or quasi offences or the law. C. C., Arts. 1760, 2293, 2294, 2315, 3536; C. P., Arts. 326, 328.

Nor in our view can Sincer derive any action against Bell by the payment of the judgment. That judgment was against Sincer alone, adjudging him liable for negligence. Bell had settled and been discharged by the parties injured. There could be, as between Sincer and Bell, no contribution arising out of that payment, for contribution, when admitted, is on the theory that payment by one discharges another also.

There is a responsibility in damages for the acts of those for whom one is answerable. It follows that a principal compelled to pay damages for the acts of his subordinate has recourse on the subordinate. But this grows out of the relation of master and servant, and no such relation existed between Bell and Sincer. C. C., Arts. 2317, 2320.

The plaintiff, however, earnestly maintains there was the obligation on Bell's part to furnish a safe staging for the painters in doing the painting. We have given attention to this branch of the case, as affording, if the contention was supported, the basis of plaintiff's action. There is testimony that in fixing the price for the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
29 cases
  • Shannon v. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Louisiana
    • 20 Septiembre 1945
    ...a wrongdoer," went on to show what had been held in the case of Sutton v. Champagne, supra. It showed further that the Sincer v. Heirs of Bell, 47 La.Ann. 1548, 18 So. 755, was not applicable, and in support of its instant doctrine makes the following quotation from the case of Pennsylvania......
  • Cole v. Celotex Corp.
    • United States
    • Louisiana Supreme Court
    • 28 Mayo 1992
    ...v. Wicker, 178 La. 289, 151 So. 208 (1933); Aetna Life Insurance Co. v. DeJean, 185 La. 1074, 171 So. 450 (1936); Sincer v. Bell, 47 La.Ann. 1548, 18 So. 755 (1895); Harvey v. Travelers Insurance Co., 163 So.2d 915, 919 (La.App. 1st Cir.1964) (collecting cases); See Comment, Contribution Am......
  • Brenham v. Southern Pacific Company
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Louisiana
    • 18 Junio 1971
    ...on the Law of Obligations 147 (Evans transl. 1826); Note, 43 Tul.L.Rev. 153, 157 (1968). The same idea was expressed in Sincer v. Bell, 47 La.Ann. 1548, 18 So. 755 (1895), where the court There could be, as between Sincer and Bell, no contribution arising out of that payment, for contributi......
  • Reed v. New Orleans Great Northern R. Co.
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 1 Enero 1934
    ... ... the holding of the Supreme Court of Louisiana in the case of ... Sincer v. Heirs of Bell, 47 La. Ann. 1548, 18 So ... 755, interpreting the said ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT